Meh R.Lee was not infantry though he was in aircraft maintenance so he did not have to hump an M14 through jungle,delta,highlands,....hell.Most true grunts from Vietnam whom I now where actually grunts pretty well liked the M16 sure it was not perfect but the M14 was a bit bulky and in most operational areas in Vietnam where much more claustrophobic where the long range advantage of an M14 would not have leneded itself well.Plus the weight factor in such a brutal climate as Vietnam this is a very important factor.Kind of like WWII in the Pacific many preferred the M1 carbine over other small arms for the same reasons.


Also people tend to ignore Aussie and New Zeland troops who had the choice between the M16 and the L1A1 and many preferred the M16.

Those quotes are most likely from the battle of Hamburger Hill in 1969 or the Battle of Hill 881 there was another hill battle in 1967 which I have read of but can't seem to recall the name of where the troops where ordered to pick up enemy weapons and complete the advance to take the hill or die where they stood.

Probably right exactly were we are today anyways. After all it's been pretty conclusively proven that the AK was not based the 44 and neither was the M1 Carbine.

The other day Skybird was getting on to people for doing the very thing he just did in this thread not to call anyone out but it is what it is.

As if the STG44 was the first attempt at an "assault rifle" to use the term loosely.

Whatever. The SG44 left quite a huge impression in Russian - and Western - minds, and Kalashnikov himself said in a rare interview about which I have read many years ago that the SG44 tremendously influenced his thinking - both in things he took over and things he made different. He said the Russians rated the concept of the SG44 and its military value in the war as very high. He said without the SG44 he would have done the AK quite differently - again both regarding design decisions "copying" the German SG'S characteristics and design decisions that were made to "replace" details in the German weapon. Also, the idea behind the SG44 - to combine carbine and machine pistol and make support by LMG and MMG less essential, was a kickstart to similiar brainstorming in East and West.

Technically, the SG44 and the AK47 are quite different, still, the SG44 has influenced the design of this and similar machine carbines (as would be the correct German term instead of assault rifle).

The SG44 gets used in third world conflicts until today. And German wikipedia says ammunition for it still gets manufactured, for example in Serbia.

RIP to a great man with a great idea turned into a great innovation. :salute:

Tales of the Gun - AK-47 (45:57)

Mentions much of what some are discussing in this thread. I watched it earlier today, but didn't bother linking it.

Meh, the tilting bolt design of the StG 44 is a world away from the AK-47.

The AK is closer to a SVT or a SKS, heck, even an M1 Garand internally than a StG. I don't doubt the StG 44 influenced the AK, but I believe more of it comes from the Soviet's own designs.

Anyhow, I need to do a mag dump for Mr. Kalashnikov.:03:

http://imageshack.us/a/img7/9121/qwedje213.jpg

Mag dump did you say?

In Memory Of Kalashnikov: 700 Round AK Burn

Edit:
Although, I'd have been more impressed if he was using a class 3 AK.

Sounds like fun...

I really love shooting AK's. They're great rifles on and off the battlefield IMHO.

the esthetics of handheld firepower
 

Or down there:hmmm:

The Russian army had huge stockpiles of AK's that would have armed the reserves in case of a general mobilization. But in 2011 the weapons failed to pass Russian army's qualification tests, quoting its poor aim and the change in the kind of warfare to be expected. No longer is it about huge masses of enemies that are to be mowed down in epic land battles, but precision against small forces that move agile and quickly, and about individual targets. The weapon, says the Russian army, no longer meets the needs of the to-be-expected armed conflicts of the forseeable future. Who am I to challenge the Russians over their own assessment of their own national idol.

Kalashnikov himself had doubts about his life's work record when he became older. He was aware that his invention had become the killing tool of choice of terrorists, ruthless general in civil wars that sent child soldiers into battle, and today I read in Der Tagesspiegel that in a TV documentation from around the year 2000 he voiced worries about his fate in afterlife, fearing to suffer hellfire for what he had done. It seems he was a man of religious belief. And clearly he knew what the invention of the AK47 has meant and caused in the world.

Iconic the weapon is - but iconic for many sides and many users with questionable reputation. It seems as a man of higher age he did not get over his role in this "achievement".

You know, as much as a gun nut people here probably think I am now, I have never held a kalashnikov of any sort in my hands. I don't even think i've asked to see them at gun shops. Hell, I had a gold membership to a local range where I had access to check out rental's for free anytime i wanted as part of that membership , class 3 full auto AK's, and never bothered to check one out. :roll: :oops:

I think i caught similar impressions elsewhere. Maybe in the 45 minute documentary i linked earlier, maybe elsewhere, i dunno, i watch/listen to a lot of documentaries. But on this subject, a quote by a fellow named Jeff Cooper comes to mind:

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

me neither:yeah:

RIP AK
Great rifle in its time but out dated today and also a bit over glorified .:haha:

Not when you are on the receiving end and they will be around for some time after they are no longer effective for a modern military.In some parts of the world the jump was from muzzle loaders to the AK for these folks one design is suitable for a few generations.

All though bullet wounds are a less common form of causality for a counter insurgency force make no mistake that the AK47 is still doing what it was designed to do just fine.

Many other firearms receive their fair of veneration in most cases that veneration is earned that does not a firearm the ultimate weapon but tell me how many people ever heard of the Chachat?

One thing many over look the AK47 was that it had been in production since 1949 and did not see a major conflict until the early 60's in that roughly 14 years it had been improved several times and in fact the original design had already been replaced in Soviet service by the AKM.The Type 56 which is what the majority of AK type rifles used by the NVA and VC was the Chinese version of the AKM so it was of course a design based on 14 years of experience and bug correcting. The M16 on the other had was first designed in 1956/57 as the AR15 and first entered service as a military rifle in 1963.It had a very poorly performed testing process and the Army changed the powered type to one that greatly increased the amount of residue build up not to mention the fact that none of the parts where chromed.So no wonder the AK47 was better performer in the hands of conscript troops.

If anything the AK vs M16 argument simply proves the blind engineering over confidence that existed in the US at the time period (lets face it every nation has this pride to some extent).They thought that they could make a better weapon that had already been in development for over a decade in a matter of years.In the end at the peak of their respective designs both rifles are good kit so long as they are properly treated and used where their specific strengths are best.

So I can understand the veneration that the AK receives I also know that anyone who says that they never jam and never misfire is a liar or has not fired one more than just casually every firearm has malfuctions from time to time even the most cared for.Stovepipe for example a person who has never had that happen with a firearm is a hardcore layman the one who makes the malfunction free claim you can be rest assure does not know what a stovepipe is.

Have you ever been on receiving end of anything?
Sure you dont.
You dont want to be on the receiving end of a bow....not that i compare AK to bow as a pun.
Yes AK will stay for a long time , yet not with modern armed forces.

Oh yes. If wikipedia is accurate, the AK-47 alone, has had 75 million produced. Compare that to the Mosin-Nagant 37 million produced. The Mosin has been so plentiful in supply, as to be one of the cheapest bolt guns you can buy that fires a full sized cartridge. It's usually priced in todays market at about 160 to 200 dollars depending on condition. So comparatively, Kalashnikov's must be falling out of trees.

EDIT:
I must point out that the age of a firearm does not dictate obsolescence. For example some would say that 1911 handgun (you know, the handgun that has been around since before WW1) is obsolete, but how now the US marines are acutaly issuing them out again on a limited basis. Or the Browning M2 machine gun. Designed in 1933, and has never left service. Both of these examples predate any kalashnikov rifle.

So i would submit that while the AK may not be "all that and a bag of chips", and it may not be the best selective fire rifle in an intermediate cartridge, it does what it was designed to do well enough.

Its not about the age.
Its about its design which does not work and its not flexible enough to adapt it to the requirement of modern armed forced.

AK nowadays has no real advantage besides being reliable and cheap which is good thing but not enough anymore.

Do you have any supportive points for your assertion? Picitianny rails don't count. It's not hard to change furniture and put all the tacticool toys on just about anything.

If one was to a general look at the criteria for Assault rifles:
- selective fire
- intermediate cartridge
- engagement of targets at a maximum range of 200 to 300 yards.

While an AK may not be as accurate as other rifles, I do think it is accurate enough for the role intended, and will kill you just the same as anything in the M16 family of rifles. Although if your argument is beyond platform's and is more about the role of the intermediate cartridge itself, that is something entirely different.

:03: